The DC Preservation League and Cultural Heritage Partners have filed a federal lawsuit challenging President Trump's announced plans to repaint the historic Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB). The legal action, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks an emergency injunction to ensure the building undergoes proper federal preservation and environmental review procedures before any renovation work begins.
President Trump recently shared his vision for the project on social media, posting before-and-after renderings showing the building's distinctive granite facade painted white. The proposed renovation represents the latest in a series of beautification efforts the Commander in Chief has pursued for national landmarks during his administration. The lawsuit names President Donald J. Trump, acting General Services Administration administrator Michael J. Rigas, and acting National Park Service director Jessica Bowron as defendants, along with their respective agencies.
During a recent Fox News interview with host Laura Ingraham, Trump defended his vision when asked if painting the French Second Empire Style building white would turn it into a "big white blob." The President responded that he doesn't view it that way, explaining that the renovation is intended to "bring out the detailing" of the ornate structure. The EEOB's granite exterior features elaborate ironwork and distinctive mansard roofs, housing offices for approximately 1,500 federal employees including staff from the Office of the Vice President, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of War.
According to the lawsuit, any exterior modifications to the EEOB must comply with both the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. These federal laws require comprehensive analysis, public input, expert consultation, and evaluation of potential impacts before changes can be made to National Historic Landmarks. "Federal law requires a careful, public, and expert review before irreversible changes are made to a National Historic Landmark," stated Greg Werkheiser, founding partner of Cultural Heritage Partners, in a press release. "We are filing this lawsuit to ensure that these long-standing protections are honored and that the public gets the transparency and due process the law guarantees."
The legal challenge highlights concerns about potential damage from the proposed work. Plaintiffs argue that applying paint to the building's masonry could cause significant harm through trapped moisture, leading to cracking and deterioration. They also emphasize the difficulty of paint removal once applied, warning that this could result in permanent damage to the original historic materials. Additionally, the lawsuit cautions against improper cleaning techniques, which could harm stone and mortar joints while causing discoloration or structural cracking.
This controversy follows previous preservation disputes involving Trump's modifications to federal historic properties. Last month, preservationists criticized the administration when construction equipment caused damage to the White House's East Wing during work to create a 90,000-square-foot ballroom. The pattern of bypassing established protocols for historic building alterations has drawn consistent opposition from preservation advocates.
The lawsuit seeks both declaratory and injunctive relief to halt the renovation plans until proper procedures are followed. Plaintiffs are also requesting compensation for attorney fees and legal costs associated with the case. The legal challenge underscores the ongoing tension between presidential renovation ambitions and federal historic preservation requirements designed to protect America's architectural heritage for future generations.
